5 ms·

That is interesting that you brought up conforming to something. I didn't. Sacrifice is a mindset of putting others ahead of yourself (this is essential in havi

That is interesting that you brought up conforming to something. I didn't. Sacrifice is a mindset of putting others ahead of yourself (this is essential in having a well-formed family) for the greater good of those around you. This attitude of Americans that you are presenting is probably the biggest cause for your downfall. The participants in the formation of your nation (the creators of your constitution) recognised the fact that sacrifice is necessary and that being responsible is essential for the well-being of society. Responsibility and sacrifice do not have to be associated with conformity and keeping your head down. Nor do they have to be associated with deferring to your betters, You have a very poor understanding of what responsibility and sacrifice actually mean if you associate them with the latter characteristics. The American self-image is very much a "holier than thou" mindset and has engendered a response such that any American is to be considered a useless arrogant busy-body who has little or no understanding of anything. Considering that, as a nation, American has a foundation in its constitution that surpasses pretty much every other nation, American falls to the bottom of nations in which justice, mercy and freedom exist. I have dealt with Americans that I have thought very highly of. Unfortunately, these have been the very small minority. The rest have been inattentive, ignorant, bombastic, arrogant know-it-alls who have failed to show any desire to actually be part of the solution. They have acted in every way to be a part of (if not all of) the problem. The inherent problems in American society, the lack of justice, of mercy and of freedom, are a result of this attitude. In many ways, America today is no different to China and Russia or any other tin-pot country around the world. If Americans actually took a serious interest in the American constitution and actively took part in building their society, we might actually find something worthwhile to emulate. American has become a place that many have no interest in ever visiting because it has no justice, no mercy and certainly no freedom.

KGIII 9y ago
Your last sentence intrigues me. You do know that hyperbole is lies, right? All three of those things exist in America. Let's take Chelsea Manning as an example, shall we? She broke the law and went to jail. Justice was served. Obama commuted her sentence. She was shown mercy. Now she is no longer incarcerated. She has freedom. I could go on for days listing examples, but I need only list the one to counter absolutist statements. There are many honest reasons to complain about America. I'm not sure why you'd go that route.
- oldandtired 9y ago
  Let's look at the illegal activities of the American government and its organisations that led to the Manning revelations, shall we? Committed a public service for the citizenry of America (irrespective of any "laws" that may have been broken - demonstrated the illegal activities of the government). Justice was not served as the government perpetrators were never sent to prison - this included POTUS. Mercy was only shown as it was politically necessary. You government approves of and participates in the confiscation of money and goods from people who are never charged with any crime. What do they call this - civil forfeiture? When a government breaks its own constitution and laws or makes laws that allow some activity to be legal only for the government but prisonable for the citizenry, then you have a very serious problem. Killing its own citizens, stealing from its own citizens, treating its own citizens as criminals first - these go on for page after page after page. There is no justice, no mercy and no freedom in America today. So it's not hyperbole, it's the reality of what America has become.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    You write: > Responsibility and sacrifice do not have to be associated with conformity and keeping your head down. Nor do they have to be associated with deferring to your betters Interestingly, Manning is a good example of exactly that. Even better would be Snowden, who took extra care to not do any harm to innocent people who could be endangered by the leaks.
  - KGIII 9y ago
    So now you've moved the goalposts. You went from no to some. Yes, that is hyperbole. America has faults, plenty of them in fact. But, I gave examples of all three of the things you claimed we had none of. And yes, yes we do have faults. Man, have we got faults. We aren't all bad or in truly dire straights. We do have Nazis marching in the streets but, in the US, they are free to do so - and we are free to counter march. Not only are we free to do so, we have the liberty to do so.
    - meddlepal 9y ago
      Bingo. The point of our system is to protect the rights of the individual over the commons. Disagree with the premise if you want but the system is designed to allow dissent and uncomfortable speech because time and time again governments and people have shown they are incapable of just regulation of these topics.
qball 9y ago
>Considering that, as a nation, American has a foundation in its constitution that surpasses pretty much every other nation It's strange that you claim that; as the American Constitution ranks right at the bottom in terms of forcing social accountability. It's an outdated document that allows individuals to get away with everything a reasonable society has at least some claim to punish or direct, and it's something that has held American social progress back. No hate speech laws, extensive rights against self-incrimination, no "right to be forgotten", no socialized medicine, very few equality-of-outcome initiatives, and the like. And as a result, you've correctly noted that the American commons is horribly polluted and everyone acts as if they were a (little) king. >Responsibility and sacrifice do not have to be associated with conformity and keeping your head down. Yes they do- they're inextricably linked. Let's take the example of a father providing for his children- given the choice of a risky venture vs. a more stable position at another company, the choice is now to prevent loss rather than obtain gain. So we see that as responsibility increases, so does the requirement to not rock the boat, so to speak. Never change a running system. Now let's extrapolate that attitude to individuals in a society. The more that individual feels beholden to it, the more they'll limit risky action in favor of stability. Their window of tolerable risk shrinks- and while they're very unlikely to do anything that costs that society, they're also unlikely to make it prosper. And as a result, any (read: above-average) member of the society has already checked out because even if they have something that will work, it's less likely they'll find others willing to risk what little individual time/capital they have on it (and it's not like they'll ever see a meaningful reward for that risk either as the society feels entitled to most of it). So either you have a society in which individuals feel beholden to it, in which case you get something that's pretty good for everyone but can't properly reward the people who end up doing most of the work (it's more important than usual that those people believe they owe society something); or you don't, in which case the poor get barely-passable treatment but being objectively useful tends to bring big rewards (and incentivizes advancing the capabilities of the human race). You can't both encourage deference to society and thinking outside of that society's standards at the same time- you either pick one or the other and live with the benefits and detriments. It'd sure be nice to have both, but you can't beat human nature or reality.
- grasshopperpurp 9y ago
eli_gottlieb 9y ago
>Considering that, as a nation, American has a foundation in its constitution that surpasses pretty much every other nation What? No! America's constitution was designed to establish a "natural aristocracy" of major landowners! Our much-vaunted First Amendment never stopped them from putting Eugene Debs in jail, you know.

KGIII 9y ago

Your last sentence intrigues me. You do know that hyperbole is lies, right? All three of those things exist in America. Let's take Chelsea Manning as an example, shall we? She broke the law and went to jail. Justice was served. Obama commuted her sentence. She was shown mercy. Now she is no longer incarcerated. She has freedom. I could go on for days listing examples, but I need only list the one to counter absolutist statements. There are many honest reasons to complain about America. I'm not sure why you'd go that route.

oldandtired 9y ago
Let's look at the illegal activities of the American government and its organisations that led to the Manning revelations, shall we? Committed a public service for the citizenry of America (irrespective of any "laws" that may have been broken - demonstrated the illegal activities of the government). Justice was not served as the government perpetrators were never sent to prison - this included POTUS. Mercy was only shown as it was politically necessary. You government approves of and participates in the confiscation of money and goods from people who are never charged with any crime. What do they call this - civil forfeiture? When a government breaks its own constitution and laws or makes laws that allow some activity to be legal only for the government but prisonable for the citizenry, then you have a very serious problem. Killing its own citizens, stealing from its own citizens, treating its own citizens as criminals first - these go on for page after page after page. There is no justice, no mercy and no freedom in America today. So it's not hyperbole, it's the reality of what America has become.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  You write: > Responsibility and sacrifice do not have to be associated with conformity and keeping your head down. Nor do they have to be associated with deferring to your betters Interestingly, Manning is a good example of exactly that. Even better would be Snowden, who took extra care to not do any harm to innocent people who could be endangered by the leaks.
- KGIII 9y ago
  So now you've moved the goalposts. You went from no to some. Yes, that is hyperbole. America has faults, plenty of them in fact. But, I gave examples of all three of the things you claimed we had none of. And yes, yes we do have faults. Man, have we got faults. We aren't all bad or in truly dire straights. We do have Nazis marching in the streets but, in the US, they are free to do so - and we are free to counter march. Not only are we free to do so, we have the liberty to do so.
  - meddlepal 9y ago
    Bingo. The point of our system is to protect the rights of the individual over the commons. Disagree with the premise if you want but the system is designed to allow dissent and uncomfortable speech because time and time again governments and people have shown they are incapable of just regulation of these topics.

qball 9y ago

>Considering that, as a nation, American has a foundation in its constitution that surpasses pretty much every other nation It's strange that you claim that; as the American Constitution ranks right at the bottom in terms of forcing social accountability. It's an outdated document that allows individuals to get away with everything a reasonable society has at least some claim to punish or direct, and it's something that has held American social progress back. No hate speech laws, extensive rights against self-incrimination, no "right to be forgotten", no socialized medicine, very few equality-of-outcome initiatives, and the like. And as a result, you've correctly noted that the American commons is horribly polluted and everyone acts as if they were a (little) king. >Responsibility and sacrifice do not have to be associated with conformity and keeping your head down. Yes they do- they're inextricably linked. Let's take the example of a father providing for his children- given the choice of a risky venture vs. a more stable position at another company, the choice is now to prevent loss rather than obtain gain. So we see that as responsibility increases, so does the requirement to not rock the boat, so to speak. Never change a running system. Now let's extrapolate that attitude to individuals in a society. The more that individual feels beholden to it, the more they'll limit risky action in favor of stability. Their window of tolerable risk shrinks- and while they're very unlikely to do anything that costs that society, they're also unlikely to make it prosper. And as a result, any (read: above-average) member of the society has already checked out because even if they have something that will work, it's less likely they'll find others willing to risk what little individual time/capital they have on it (and it's not like they'll ever see a meaningful reward for that risk either as the society feels entitled to most of it). So either you have a society in which individuals feel beholden to it, in which case you get something that's pretty good for everyone but can't properly reward the people who end up doing most of the work (it's more important than usual that those people believe they owe society something); or you don't, in which case the poor get barely-passable treatment but being objectively useful tends to bring big rewards (and incentivizes advancing the capabilities of the human race). You can't both encourage deference to society and thinking outside of that society's standards at the same time- you either pick one or the other and live with the benefits and detriments. It'd sure be nice to have both, but you can't beat human nature or reality.

grasshopperpurp 9y ago

eli_gottlieb 9y ago

>Considering that, as a nation, American has a foundation in its constitution that surpasses pretty much every other nation What? No! America's constitution was designed to establish a "natural aristocracy" of major landowners! Our much-vaunted First Amendment never stopped them from putting Eugene Debs in jail, you know.